Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting
On Sat, Mar 19, 2005 at 01:48:42AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Hi Greg,
>
> On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 02:10:47PM -0500, Greg Folkert wrote:
> > > > BTW, I am not sure this is really a good way to measure the use of an
> > > > architecture, mainly because users could use a local mirror if they have
> > > > a lot of machines of the same architecture. How about using popcon *in
> > > > addition* to that?
>
> > > This isn't being used to measure the use of the architecture; it's being
> > > used to measure the *download frequency* for the architecture, which is
> > > precisely the criterion that should be used in deciding how to structure
> > > the mirror network.
>
> > Okay, I have to comment here, seeing that I personally have at two
> > separate locations, two complete mirrors, that I use nearly everyday.
> > They only update when a change in the archive is detected. That means
> > *MY* $PRETTY_BIG_NUMBER of usages of my own mirrors in each locale will
> > mean nothing. I do my own mirror(s) so as to reduce the load on the
> > Debian network. I actually scaled back what I use, now only having 5
> > arches I support, SPARC(and UltraSPARC), Alpha, HPPA-RISC, PowerPC and
> > x86(Intel and otherwise). I dropped IA64 a while ago and will pickup
> > X86_AMD64 when it become part of Sid Proper.
>
> > How would you address the fact the bulk of my usage is not even seen by
> > your network.
>
> Hrm, in what sense is this something that needs to be "addressed" at all?
> If you use an internal mirror for your heavy internal usage, then surely
> you, as a user, don't need a diverse network of full public mirrors -- you
> just need one, solid mirror to download from, don't you?
Because there is a mess between the pure mirror issues and the
testing/security/release issues. And i get the impression (maybe wrongly) that
the lack of download may somehow influence the decision to drop those arches
from the testing/security/release side too, at least you have not hinted at
the contrary.
I think the mirror issues are fully non-problematic, and everyone agrees with
them, it is the other issues which are problematic.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: